Report No. 271 (2026) IACHR. Petition No. 11.990 (Colombia)

• Court: Inter-American Comission of Human Rights
• Year: 2025
• Case Type: Friendly Settlements
• Respondent State: Colombia

REPORT No. 271/25

CASE 11.990 B

REPORT ON FRIENDLY SETTLEMENT

JOHN JAIRO CABARIQUE

COLOMBIA

OEA/Ser.L/V/II

Doc. 286

10 December 2025

Original: Spanish

Approved electronically by the Commission on December 10, 2025.

Cite as: IACHR, Report No. 271/25, C.1.B., Friendly Settlement, John Jairo Cabarique, Colombia, December 10, 2025.

www.iachr.org

REPORT No. 271/25

CASE 11.990 B

FRIENDLY SETTLEMENT

JHON JAIRO CABARIQUE

COLOMBIA1

DECEMBER 10, 2025

1. SUMMARY AND RELEVANT PROCEEDINGS OF THE FRIENDLY SETTLEMENT PROCESS

1. On M. 9, 1998, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter ''the Commission'' or ''IACHR'') received a petition submitted by Humanidad Vigente and the Corporación Colectivo de Abogados "José Alvear Restrepo" (hereinafter ''the petitioners" or “the petitioning party") alleging the international responsibility of the Republic of Colombia (hereinafter "S." or "C. S." or "Colombia"), for the violation of human rights under Articles 4 (life), 5 (human treatment), 8 (judicial guarantees), 13 (freedom of thought and expression), 19 (rights of the child), and 25 (judicial protection) in relation to Article 1.1 (obligation to respect rights) of the American Convention on Human Rights, (hereinafter "the Convention" or "the American Convention") for the alleged extrajudicial executions of O.B.B.B., J.G.O., and J.J.C. -who was a child at the time of the events- (hereinafter "alleged victims") allegedly perpetrated by S. agents on January 10, 1997 in Saravena, department of Arauca, as well as for the lack of diligence of the judicial authorities in the investigation and punishment of those responsible for the events.

2. On October 23, 2010, the Commission issued Admissibility Report No. 124/10, in which it declared the petition admissible and declared its competence to hear the claim filed by the petitioning party regarding the alleged violation of the rights enshrined in Articles 4 (life), 5 (humane treatment), 8 (judicial guarantees), 13 (freedom of thought and expression), 19 (rights of the child), and 25 (judicial protection), of the American Convention on Human Rights in conjunction with Article 1.1 of the same instrument, to the detriment of the victims and their families.

3. In January 2013, the friendly settlement procedure was initiated in case 11.990, which initially included O.B.B.B., J.G.O. and J.J.C. as alleged victims. On May 6, 2015, the parties signed a friendly settlement agreement (hereinafter “FSA” or “agreement”)2 and requested its approval.

4. On M. 15, 2019, the petitioning party indicated that contact had been lost with the relatives of J.J.C. and requested his exclusion as a beneficiary of the agreement, along with the dismissal of the parts of the petition referring to that alleged victim. C., the original petition was divided into two cases: Case 11.990 A O.O.B.B. and J.G.3 and Case 11.990 B J.J.C.. On May 2, 2019, the Commission closed Case 11.990 B in accordance with the provisions of Article 48 (1) (b) of the American Convention on Human Rights and Article 42 of the IACHR Rules of Procedure, and notified the parties on May 9, 2019.

5. On January 20, 2020, the organization Humanidad Vigente stated that it had regained contact with the family of J.J.C. and requested that C.1.B. be reopened. On August 7, 2020, the Commission decided to reopen the case, in accordance with Article 42.3 of the IACHR Rules of Procedure, which was communicated to the parties on October 27, 2020.

6. On J. 21, 2021, the parties signed a memorandum of understanding to seek a friendly settlement, together with a timeline to move forward in the negotiations. In the following months, the parties held bilateral meetings with the purpose of analyzing the reparation measures to be included in the agreement, which resulted in the signing of said instrument on May 23, 2024, in the city of Bogotá. S., on February 13, 2025, the parties presented a joint report on the progress made with implementation of the FSA and requested the IACHR its approval.

7. P. to Articles 49 of the Convention and 40(5) of the Rules of Procedure of the Commission, this friendly settlement report includes a summary of the facts alleged by the petitioning party and transcribes the friendly settlement agreement signed on May 23, 2024 by the petitioning party and the C. S.. L., the Commission hereby approves the agreement signed by the parties and decides to publish this report in its Annual Report to the General Assembly of the Organization of American S.s.

2. THE FACTS ALLEGED

8. The petitioners alleged that on January 10, 1997, at approximately 8:30 pm, O.O.B.B., J.C.C., and Jefferson González Oquendo were traveling through the city of Saravena, Arauca Department, on two motorcycles. They maintain that when they were in front of the “Copetran” Hotel, the alleged victims were intercepted by a National Army patrol attached to the Reveis Pizarro Battalion and that the soldiers began to shoot at the alleged victims, who got off their motorcycles and started to run.

8. The petitioning party also stated that J.G. was pursued by another soldier along three streets to the yard of a house, where he was shot and killed. S., as for J.C.C., who was then 17 years old, they alleged that he was put against a wall and riddled with bullets by another one of the soldiers.

8. The petitioners maintained that on January 14, 1997, Military Criminal Court 124 opened an investigation and that on April 21, 1997, the father and the wife of O.B. lodged a complaint regarding the murder of the alleged victims by members of the National Armed Forces. In addition, they indicated that on May 20, 1997, the Prosecutor’s Office of Department 40 [Fiscalía Seccional 40] for the Judges of Saravena Circuit opened a preliminary investigation. On the other hand, they mentioned that the Prosecutor’s Office sent the case file to Military Criminal Court of First Instance 124 (hereinafter “Military Criminal Court”), which issued a writ of prohibition on J. 24, 1997, on the grounds that “the soldiers involved acted in legitimate self-defense in combat circumstances”.

8. According to the petitioner's account, on May 13, 1998, the Military Criminal Court revoked the writ of prohibition and formally opened an investigation against Corporal C.M., Lieutenant Diego Martínez, and P.R.P. for the alleged crime of murder during combat. The petitioners claimed that on J. 13, 1998, the Public Ministry [Public Prosecutors’ Office, Ministerio Público] requested the Military Criminal Court to invoke conflict of jurisdiction with the ordinary criminal courts, due to the serious inconsistencies that occurred during the investigation into the alleged acts.

8. In the petition, it was denounced that, on October 2,...